_sabotage_ wrote:I spent 5 years 9 months and 21 days in jail for marijuana and only marijuana, 9 ounces. The government informed my family that I was arrested with 250 kg of heroin. Maximum security, where I spent nearly 3 years, was half drug cases. General population was also half drug cases. We find a problem and then build walls and systems around it. The systems become self serving, ie it makes no sense to destroy your income source, drugs, since this would put you out of business. It's much better to increase the flow so you can increase arrests and make your department stronger. When Anslinger first pushed for criminalization of marijuana, he falsified all the evidence surrounding it and the only scientific research was ignored, they actual told the doctor that his study of 40k people was of no value in the decision. Anslinger later moved to the UN and had marijuana outlawed internationally, incorporating its illegality as a fixed condition to join the WTO and UN council.

We now have 1,800,000 drug arrests each year. This is taxpayers money being used to build a police state against their own people. It amuses me to hear the discourse on the drug war. If marijuana and other drugs were legal, half of the American justice, police, prison and legal systems would be redundant. Do you really think that the government is going to allow freedom of choice in exchange for half of its muscle? Do you think that the president who is surrounded by this consortium of people whose livelihoods depend on destroying families and doing the governments dirty work is going to help my former cell mates who have long given up hope?

Damn that is fucked up man...One of the biggest lobbyist groups against legalization are the police. As you say, if drugs were legal they would have a job.

Phatscotty wrote:can't wait until the state becomes dependent on the tax revenues from pot. The money raised through taxation will most likely get linked to funding children's health or children's education, something that will guarantee little resistance to outrageous tax increases on the pot in the future.

"The tax is only getting raised on the pot heads. we don't give a shit about the stoners! raise the taxes!" Marijuana users will be repeatedly pitted against whatever cause the money funds, and the burnouts aren't going to get many sympathy votes from the legislature.

...and then they will really crack down on "unauthorized sales", because the state does not like competition. And then of course you will only be able to get it on certain days, during certain hours. Don't forget to factor in the cost of all the new regulation into the price of the product. The price stability you have known all your life will double in about 36 months,

Government legalization is the last thing you guys should want. What's the big problem with the way pot is treated now anyways? The price has went down, you can get the shit anywhere, there are no taxes.....sure, you can go to jail or get a ticket, but seriously, does anyone here know someone who is in jail for smoking a joint?

WTF????

The better answer, IMO, is to decriminalize marijuana. Get the government OUT of it. Basically, the exact same argument I have been making about marriage.

Plan Colombia was $5.2 billion we spent trying to train the Colombian police and spraying herbicides on the coca crop. At the end of five years of that program, the coca production went up 25 percent in Colombia.

Comment: seems like giving money to fight drugs increases flow.

NELSON: Well, you talk about it somewhat, but you have to be careful, because everyone wants to get promoted. That's the whole purpose of going in, to work your way up the chain, where you can have more influence on what's going on.

Comment: those who help build the system are rewarded.

As a young 22-year-old coming in from a rural community, going into the academy, you listen to what they tell you and you believe it. And so you buy into—at that time you were still buying into the residual of Harry Anslinger, who said that blacks and browns use marijuana and it makes them rape white women.

Comment: LOL.

And in those days, just possession of a tiny amount of marijuana was a felony. Well, a felony arrest was a big deal for a young police officer. And so you did your job. And in those days, especially in those days, quota systems were rampant. The measurement of good police work was not an absence of crime; it was what did your recap look like at the end of the day.

Comment: so the head of the cartel and a guy on the street both face felonies and provide the same quota points. I wonder which would be easier to arrest? As a young officer striving to hit quota, do you spend 3 years on a sting operation or just grab some guy smoking a joint in a poor area?

And so by the time I was a commander, it was about the same time that President Nixon announced the war on drugs, and it was also the same time that I had just uncovered at the divisional level the growth of two small gangs. They were called the Bloods and the Crips. And they had a membership of less than 100. Those two small gangs in the 40 years of this drug war have grown to 33,000 gangs across the nation with a membership of 1.5 million.

Comment: sounds like alcohol prohibition.

Two years ago, the DOJ said the cartels control drug trafficking with the help of the gangs in 250 American cities. This year the DOJ said the drug cartels control drug trafficking in 1,000 American cities.

Comment: we provide an economy for the most dangerous criminals in the world and then think we are safer than having some strung out people on the street? 90% of the danger of drugs is due simple bc they are illegal.

So we haven't made a dent in these three strategy approaches. Addiction, drug abuse, it goes up and down. The flow of drugs is now warehouses full. The guns are tens of thousands of war-level weapons. And the money, even being laundered by domestic banks, they get a slap on the hand, there's millions of dollars on pallets.

And cutting the head off the snake, I came to discover as a police executive who likes to do a good job and likes to meet his goals and effectively execute the strategy, that was a big thing to me, because I finally decided there's no snake, it's starfish. And when you cut a starfish in half, you get two starfish. When you cut it four ways, you get four. And the only way to kill a starfish is to remove its nutrient. And in the case of the cartels and the gangs, the nutrient is money.

They can't function without money. They can't buy guns, money can't be laundered, and they'll be out of business. And so prohibition creates their opportunity for money. And if we take that black market away, we're going to dry 'em up. And that's what I discovered as a police executive.

Comment: that's when he understood that to do his job best, he had to stop doing his job.

The issue is it's institutionalized. Prison unions fight us all the time. Police unions fight us because they don't want it legalized, because then they're going to lose membership. As he mentioned earlier, the police make a tremendous amount of money from the federal government, not counting—if the police arrest someone at night, a couple of kids for a few joints, they take them in and arrest them, put them in jail, they go back the next day for a hearing, they get three hours overtime a piece. It's a money-making machine for them. They don't want to quit it.

Comment: makes sense.

The military-industrial complex does not want it to end, because if you sell a Sikorsky helicopter to Colombia for $16 million, that's nothing. It's going to cost $100 million a year to put the maintenance contract in place to keep them flying.

Comment: the simple truth is without war and drug wars our economy would suffer. The money that the Fed prints, lends to Columbia to buy weapons we say they need, from us goes into the pockets of gun runners such as good old VP Dick's Halliburton. If Columbia defaults on the loan, we pay it back. The money we are paying back didn't exist, was created for the sole purpose of putting it in to the hands of our wealthy and used to attack our freedoms.

when you get arrested for a drug offense, I don't care if they don't put you in jail; you've got an arrest record. And when you go to get a job, you check the box, they see you've had an arrest, they look and you had a drug arrest, you're not going to get hired. You're going to be marginalized the rest of your life.

Comment: ok, ok, you discovered how self serving this post is, I'm just bitter that I was caught destroying my life and those around me yet not willing to accept the punishment: a lifetime of marginalization because of 250 grams of weed when I was 20.

Final comment which wasn't addressed directly in this interview: tough on crime. Every politician wants to be tough on crime. How de define that a politician is tough on crime? Increase in arrests.

Which of these is tough on crime?

A. I've put away 3000 more criminals than the guy before me.

B. I stopped arresting non violent offenders.

Fun Fact: last time I checked, the only people in eligible for student loans were convicted drug offenders.

A comparative truth would be Vietnam. As many have said that the drug war has failed, many also say that the Vietnam war was a failure. And many now say the war on terror is failing.

What if Vietnam were considered a success by some? What if the war on terror is considered a success by some? What if the war on drugs is considered a success by some? Who benefitted from these wars? Who did these wars threaten? Why do we not see that the same people are benefitting? Why do we not see that these people are threatened by any change in the status quo if its not their agenda?

What actually happens in these wars? Do you think that munitions companies close up shop after these wars? The only thing that will help their bottom lines is fear. Why are all these wars causing fear? Fear of a country succeeding on its own and being a positive blueprint for others to follow? Fear of the police in our neighborhoods? Fear of terrorists on our soil?

We demand our safety. Quid Pro Quo. How do you think I feel about being in prison for nearly six years? How do you think I felt being attacked 5 times by guys holding shanks? How do you think I feel when I can't get a job? Did you think you we're making me safer? Do you think you we're making society safer?

I'm not a violent person, except when it's my turn in a CC game. But I wonder if the sovereignty of our nation extends to me, or by making the choice to have a choice I have somehow given it up.

_sabotage_ wrote:I spent 5 years 9 months and 21 days in jail for marijuana and only marijuana, 9 ounces. The government informed my family that I was arrested with 250 kg of heroin. Maximum security, where I spent nearly 3 years, was half drug cases. General population was also half drug cases. We find a problem and then build walls and systems around it. The systems become self serving, ie it makes no sense to destroy your income source, drugs, since this would put you out of business. It's much better to increase the flow so you can increase arrests and make your department stronger. When Anslinger first pushed for criminalization of marijuana, he falsified all the evidence surrounding it and the only scientific research was ignored, they actual told the doctor that his study of 40k people was of no value in the decision. Anslinger later moved to the UN and had marijuana outlawed internationally, incorporating its illegality as a fixed condition to join the WTO and UN council.

We now have 1,800,000 drug arrests each year. This is taxpayers money being used to build a police state against their own people. It amuses me to hear the discourse on the drug war. If marijuana and other drugs were legal, half of the American justice, police, prison and legal systems would be redundant. Do you really think that the government is going to allow freedom of choice in exchange for half of its muscle? Do you think that the president who is surrounded by this consortium of people whose livelihoods depend on destroying families and doing the governments dirty work is going to help my former cell mates who have long given up hope?

Damn that is fucked up man...One of the biggest lobbyist groups against legalization are the police. As you say, if drugs were legal they would have a job.

Phatscotty wrote:can't wait until the state becomes dependent on the tax revenues from pot. The money raised through taxation will most likely get linked to funding children's health or children's education, something that will guarantee little resistance to outrageous tax increases on the pot in the future.

"The tax is only getting raised on the pot heads. we don't give a shit about the stoners! raise the taxes!" Marijuana users will be repeatedly pitted against whatever cause the money funds, and the burnouts aren't going to get many sympathy votes from the legislature.

...and then they will really crack down on "unauthorized sales", because the state does not like competition. And then of course you will only be able to get it on certain days, during certain hours. Don't forget to factor in the cost of all the new regulation into the price of the product. The price stability you have known all your life will double in about 36 months,

Government legalization is the last thing you guys should want. What's the big problem with the way pot is treated now anyways? The price has went down, you can get the shit anywhere, there are no taxes.....sure, you can go to jail or get a ticket, but seriously, does anyone here know someone who is in jail for smoking a joint?

WTF????

The better answer, IMO, is to decriminalize marijuana. Get the government OUT of it. Basically, the exact same argument I have been making about marriage.

Do you have to post your ignorant comments in ever thread?

What makes them ignorant? Some of it has already come to pass, so you may need to check your own premise if you wish to find ignorance...

Baron von PWN wrote:The problem if you just decriminalize it, is you could still go to jail for producing it or police could fine you for possessing and then confiscate your pot.

Could you elaborate on this? It doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't decriminalization make it just like any other consumable item? I don't think the fuzz can arrest you for eating a cheeseburger, why would they be able to arrest you and confiscate your pot just for smoking or possessing it if it's not contraband?

Baron von PWN wrote:The problem if you just decriminalize it, is you could still go to jail for producing it or police could fine you for possessing and then confiscate your pot.

Could you elaborate on this? It doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't decriminalization make it just like any other consumable item? I don't think the fuzz can arrest you for eating a cheeseburger, why would they be able to arrest you and confiscate your pot just for smoking or possessing it if it's not contraband?

-TG

Decriminalizing the substance doesen't make it legal. It merely makes it less ilegal. For instance, possesion of pot is decriminalized in Canada. What this means is that if a cop sees me smoking a joint they can confiscate it and destroy it, maybe if they are feeling like an asshole fine me. Nothing will go on my record it stops there. That's just a small amount though.

If I'm a dealer or a producer, and have a large quantity of pot. Like several ounces or more than 2 plants, I could face serious jail time.

Decriminalising only makes it easier on the consumer of the drug. The production and distribution is still ilegal. It's a strange half measure which acknowledges the complete lack of danger in the substance, but stubornly insists on keeping it ilegal(it's just no big deal if you get caught) .

Phatscotty's opposition to legalisation is as usual completely bizare. Against legalization of pot because it will hinder his economic freedom in the form of taxes, or pot will cost more. Which seems to completely ingore the costs of being sent to jail or the loss of liberty from the state arbitrairily deciding pot should be ilegal.

Baron von PWN wrote:Decriminalizing the substance doesen't make it legal. It merely makes it less ilegal. For instance, possesion of pot is decriminalized in Canada. What this means is that if a cop sees me smoking a joint they can confiscate it and destroy it, maybe if they are feeling like an asshole fine me. Nothing will go on my record it stops there. That's just a small amount though.

That doesn't sound like decriminalization, then. One would expect from the structure of the word that it wouldn't be criminalized. I still fail to see the difference then between pot and a cheeseburger. Is there a specific law which states that cheeseburgers are legal? Because I'm then led to believe that a cop could confiscate my cheesburger, destroy (or stuff his fat face with it) and then fine me.

Let the government run the Sahara Desert, there will be a shortage of sand in 5 years.

The tax is only 15% in Colorado and 25% in Washington I don't see how that would lead to prices doubling. In fact prices are projected to drop according to the marijuana lawyer who guest lectured for one of my classes. Which makes sense because the fact that anyone is allowed to grow up to 6 plants (in Colorado) will drive down the prices at retail shops

_sabotage_ wrote:I spent 5 years 9 months and 21 days in jail for marijuana and only marijuana, 9 ounces. The government informed my family that I was arrested with 250 kg of heroin. Maximum security, where I spent nearly 3 years, was half drug cases. General population was also half drug cases. We find a problem and then build walls and systems around it. The systems become self serving, ie it makes no sense to destroy your income source, drugs, since this would put you out of business. It's much better to increase the flow so you can increase arrests and make your department stronger. When Anslinger first pushed for criminalization of marijuana, he falsified all the evidence surrounding it and the only scientific research was ignored, they actual told the doctor that his study of 40k people was of no value in the decision. Anslinger later moved to the UN and had marijuana outlawed internationally, incorporating its illegality as a fixed condition to join the WTO and UN council.

We now have 1,800,000 drug arrests each year. This is taxpayers money being used to build a police state against their own people. It amuses me to hear the discourse on the drug war. If marijuana and other drugs were legal, half of the American justice, police, prison and legal systems would be redundant. Do you really think that the government is going to allow freedom of choice in exchange for half of its muscle? Do you think that the president who is surrounded by this consortium of people whose livelihoods depend on destroying families and doing the governments dirty work is going to help my former cell mates who have long given up hope?

Here's the thing about pot:It's illegal in most places so when you have several ounces you are most likely selling it for profit. If you are selling something illegal for profit you are taking a risk by trying to get something for nothing. The something is monetary gain that you make from selling something illegal that you would not gain if the substance were legal. This applies to lots and lots of things and it doesn't matter much what the substance is. Drugs, stolen goods, kidnapped people, whatever. It's not the drugs that is the issue, it's the act of trying to circumvent the bounds of our society for personal gain and it's punishable for a reason.Also, pot is one of those things that, justly or unjustly, is used to bring in people who are guilty of other things but there is not sufficient evidence. It's used as a hook so to speak. Whether this is right or wrong I don't know but I do know that the cops don't just go busting into random people's houses looking for pot and throwing them in jail.

2dimes wrote:There's a reason it's called "weed". If it was legal it would probably be pretty easy to keep the price down.

Indeed.They could mass produce the stuff which "grows like a weed" without fear of the law and the price would eventually plummet. Look at the manufacture of alcohol ; it's a pretty complicated/expensive process in comparison and is still relatively cheap.

Last edited by Funkyterrance on Sat Dec 08, 2012 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Baron von PWN wrote:Decriminalizing the substance doesen't make it legal. It merely makes it less ilegal. For instance, possesion of pot is decriminalized in Canada. What this means is that if a cop sees me smoking a joint they can confiscate it and destroy it, maybe if they are feeling like an asshole fine me. Nothing will go on my record it stops there. That's just a small amount though.

That doesn't sound like decriminalization, then. One would expect from the structure of the word that it wouldn't be criminalized. I still fail to see the difference then between pot and a cheeseburger. Is there a specific law which states that cheeseburgers are legal? Because I'm then led to believe that a cop could confiscate my cheesburger, destroy (or stuff his fat face with it) and then fine me.

bah.

-TG

There isin't. But there is a specific law saying marijuana is ilegal. Possesion of marijuana is a non criminal offense. Like say a speeding ticket. It's ilegal to speed, but if you are caught speeding you won't be sent to jail , it won't go on your record, you just get a ticket.

Decriminalizing it , just makes it a non criminal offense to posses weed. It's still illegal.

Let the government run the Sahara Desert, there will be a shortage of sand in 5 years.

The tax is only 15% in Colorado and 25% in Washington I don't see how that would lead to prices doubling. In fact prices are projected to drop according to the marijuana lawyer who guest lectured for one of my classes. Which makes sense because the fact that anyone is allowed to grow up to 6 plants (in Colorado) will drive down the prices at retail shops

Oh? Prices are up15-25% right off that bat? Well then, I guess the taxes and the fees and the permits and the costs will never go up in the future.....

Actually, it doesn't make sense. What are the prices at the retail shops that are used for the comparison? Why would people who grow their own be any different from what we already have? Why would we expect their quality to even be marketable? The thinking of the lawyer sounds highly simplistic. Did anyone ask about his background in understanding the marketplace, and government force? It's more expensive for the government or a corporation to transport the product too. How much would you expect the price to be when scientists who are paid 200k a year are "called in to help". How about prices after unionization of the weed market. How about prices after the rent and taxes and electricity and insurance and health insurance for all employees who work at the weed shops and laboratories and warehouses. inspections and investigations into regulations, and government oversight agencies?

I can see it working based on the alcohol model, but I do not think today's business/government environment would "allow" the alcohol model. Since the government would be the one "creating/allowing" a newly regulated market, the government is going to have all the power and all the control.

If there needs to be a new law made, make it "weed is none of the governments business, period". You can have the sales taxes that go on everything else

Unfortunately, now it is the government's business more than ever before. It's their business through their "responsibility of paying the costs for your health" takeover. Ya see, if you get lung cancer, well, then, that ends up costing the government money, therefore they have the authority to relay the health costs of marijuana use onto the consumer of the product.

What scientist would you call in that cost 200k a year? This is a plant like any other crop that can be grown. Marijuana growers are as serious about their plants as tomato growers. There isn't that much regulation on growing a farm unless your trying to get certified organic. So scientist, laboratories and warehouses are out of the question unless you see marijuana grown on a large more corporate/industrial scale. Transportation won't be a problem either because of the proximity of growers to urban areas. Lets face it you can grow this shit in you back yard or in a closet at a very low cost. The people who will reap the most reward will be the hemp growers but this isn't what we are talking about.

The prices will most likely be the same, if anything they will drop. You will have lots of people treating this as a gold rush so more people will grow weed who weren't before, regardless of whether they smoke it or not. You will also see more dispensaries which probably won't be as regulated as most tobacco shops. You'll probably find that most tobacco shops will be ahead of the games due to the similar products.

At times it is better to say nothing at all then to make yourself look foolish over and over again.

Nola_Lifer wrote:What scientist would you call in that cost 200k a year? This is a plant like any other crop that can be grown. Marijuana growers are as serious about their plants as tomato growers. There isn't that much regulation on growing a farm unless your trying to get certified organic. So scientist, laboratories and warehouses are out of the question unless you see marijuana grown on a large more corporate/industrial scale. Transportation won't be a problem either because of the proximity of growers to urban areas. Lets face it you can grow this shit in you back yard or in a closet at a very low cost. The people who will reap the most reward will be the hemp growers but this isn't what we are talking about.

The prices will most likely be the same, if anything they will drop. You will have lots of people treating this as a gold rush so more people will grow weed who weren't before, regardless of whether they smoke it or not. You will also see more dispensaries which probably won't be as regulated as most tobacco shops. You'll probably find that most tobacco shops will be ahead of the games due to the similar products.

Beer brewers are serious about their beer too. It doesn't make them competitors in the marketplace

If it's legalised it will become an industry like any other, but there will also be multiple entrants into the market.

So the downwards pressure on prices from competition, coupled with the downward pressures on cost of supply due to economies of scale, will (to an unknown extent) balance out the upward pressure on prices due to extra taxes. Whether that means the price ends up higher or lower than on the black market is debatable, but I suspect it will not be significantly more than the black market because the black market will still be there in some form providing extra competition too. The guy who grows weed in his wardrobe illegally and makes a profit on it and gets his for free in the bargain won't stop just because the shop down the road can do it, unless the shop down the road can do it cheaper than him and takes all his customers.

crispybits wrote:If it's legalised it will become an industry like any other, but there will also be multiple entrants into the market.

So the downwards pressure on prices from competition, coupled with the downward pressures on cost of supply due to economies of scale, will (to an unknown extent) balance out the upward pressure on prices due to extra taxes. Whether that means the price ends up higher or lower than on the black market is debatable, but I suspect it will not be significantly more than the black market because the black market will still be there in some form providing extra competition too. The guy who grows weed in his wardrobe illegally and makes a profit on it and gets his for free in the bargain won't stop just because the shop down the road can do it, unless the shop down the road can do it cheaper than him and takes all his customers.

I understand all that. I just bet that isn't how it happens, and that prices will be a lot higher in the short term (3-5 years)

Cigarettes more than doubled in a very short time, some places even tripled. My main point is and has been "Nobody cares about the smokers". It's self explanatory how this all ends up. Yes, in theory, if we had good government and economic Liberty, sounds great. We do not have that though.

crispybits wrote:If it's legalised it will become an industry like any other, but there will also be multiple entrants into the market.

So the downwards pressure on prices from competition, coupled with the downward pressures on cost of supply due to economies of scale, will (to an unknown extent) balance out the upward pressure on prices due to extra taxes. Whether that means the price ends up higher or lower than on the black market is debatable, but I suspect it will not be significantly more than the black market because the black market will still be there in some form providing extra competition too. The guy who grows weed in his wardrobe illegally and makes a profit on it and gets his for free in the bargain won't stop just because the shop down the road can do it, unless the shop down the road can do it cheaper than him and takes all his customers.

I understand all that. I just bet that isn't how it happens, and that prices will be a lot higher in the short term (3-5 years)

Cigarettes more than doubled in a very short time, some places even tripled. My main point is and has been "Nobody cares about the smokers". It's self explanatory how this all ends up. Yes, in theory, if we had good government and economic Liberty, sounds great. We do not have that though.

So what would your solution be? What would you suggest to keep prices from rising?

Also, cigarettes aren't easy for people to grow in their basement or cupboard. Pot is. The existing black market will regulate the emerging white market in terms of price to start with and that effect wasnt present for cigarettes to the same extent (illegal smuggled ones from Mexico or wherever notwithstanding, there weren't growers in every town)

crispybits wrote:Also, cigarettes aren't easy for people to grow in their basement or cupboard. Pot is. The existing black market will regulate the emerging white market in terms of price to start with and that effect wasnt present for cigarettes to the same extent (illegal smuggled ones from Mexico or wherever notwithstanding, there weren't growers in every town)

Forgive me I do not recall the proper terminology I am trying to describe, but it's the kind of market where it doesn't matter how much something cost to produce/distribute, it mostly matters how much you can get for it/how much people are willing to pay, or more specifically how much you need for it.

Think of a passport, or a drivers license. Does it really cost 135$/28$ to produce? Or even a Louis Vuitton bag...

Smoking/buying/growing marijuana, even after legalization, will be considered a privilege/luxury Prices can get pretty blurry in this area. If I can make a summary/comparison, the same thing that happened to the price of tobacco and cigarettes will happen to marijuana.